Salt Lake Criminal Defense Attorney Utah
Criminal Defense Attorney Stephen Howard
Call Criminal Defense Attorney in Utah
Call Utah Criminal Lawyer
Experienced Criminal Defense Lawyers / Former Prosecutors
Call 801-449-1409 now to see what the right attorney can do for you.
Utah Criminal Defense Lawyer Salt Lake City

Criminal Defense Solutions Start HereSM

Finding a Felony Defense LawyerChoosing a Misdemeanor Defense LawyerDrug and Alcohol Crimes Defense LawyerWhite Collar Defense Attorney for Utah ChargesAttorney for Expungements Reductions and PardonsDefendant Constitutional Rights Criminal LawyerBail and Bond Alternatives in UtahReasons for Hope Facing Criminal Charges

Utah Criminal Defense Attorney Salt Lake City

On October 28, 2015, the Utah Supreme Court announced the promulgation of a new evidentiary rule, governing the admissibility of statements made during custodial interrogations in Utah felony cases. The rule places significant restrictions on the use of such statements, unless police make a recording of the statement available to defense counsel and at trial. The rule takes effect January 1, 2016.

If you are facing criminal prosecution in Utah, the assistance of an experienced criminal defense attorney is critical. Contact us today to arrange for an initial confidential consultation with Utah criminal lawyer Stephen Howard.

Utah Rules of Evidence - Rule 616 - Admissibility of Statements Made in Custodial Interrogations

The new Rule 616 of the Utah Rules of Evidence provides generally that in felony prosecutions, a statement made by a criminal defendant during a custodial interrogation that occurs in a "place of detention" is not admissible against the defendant unless an electronic recording of the statement was created and is made available at trial. Subsection (b) of the rule makes it clear that this rule "is in addition to" and is not intended to diminish any other requirements of a defendant's admissions or statements. The "other requirements" referred to should be interpreted as including other rules of evidence as well as Fifth Amendment constitutional protections as interpreted by case law, including the United States Supreme Court decision in Miranda and its progeny.

The rule states, "Except as otherwise provided in Subsection (c) of this rule, evidence of a statement made by the defendant during a custodial interrogation in a place of detention shall not be admitted against the defendant in a felony criminal prosecution unless an electronic recording of the statement was made and is available at trial. This requirement is in addition to, and does not diminish, any other requirement regarding the admissibility of a person’s statements."

While Rule 616 appears to create a broad prohibition on the use of unrecorded statements made during custodial interrogations, the rule also provides a number of exceptions that severely limit the effect of the rule. These exceptions include:
  • Statements that were made prior to January 1, 2016;
  • Statements that were made during a custodial interrogation that occurred outside Utah and was conducted by officers of a jurisdiction outside Utah;
  • Statements that are is offered for impeachment purposes only;
  • Statements that were spontaneously made outside the course of a custodial interrogation or made during routine processing or booking of the person;
  • Statements made when, before or during a custodial interrogation, the person agreed to respond to questions only if his or her statements were not electronically recorded, provided that such agreement is electronically recorded or documented in writing;
  • Statements made when the law enforcement officers conducting the custodial interrogation in good faith failed to make an electronic recording because the officers inadvertently failed to operate the recording equipment properly, or without the knowledge of any of the officers the recording equipment malfunctioned or stopped operating;
  • Statements made when the law enforcement officers conducting or observing the custodial interrogation reasonably believed that the crime for which the person was being investigated was not a felony under Utah law;
  • Statements made when substantial exigent circumstances existed that prevented or rendered unfeasible the making of an electronic recording of the custodial interrogation, or prevented its preservation and availability at trial;
Rule 616 further provides that the court may allow unrecorded statements to be used at trial if the court finds: first, that the statement has "substantial guarantees of trustworthiness and reliability equivalent to those of an electronic recording;" and, second, that "admitting the statement best serves the purposes of [the rules of evidence] and the interests of justice."

This final exception is potentially broad enough to eclipse the general rule that unrecorded statements should be excluded. The rule does not define or otherwise explain what kinds of guarantees of trustworthiness and reliability are "equivalent to those of an electronic recording." The rule also gives no guidance as to how to determine when the admission of an unrecorded statement "best serves . . . the interests of justice."

The apparent purpose of this rule appears to be to reduce uncertainty relating to the reliability of alleged confessions in criminal cases. But the way that courts decide to interpret this rule could greatly limit its ultimate effect in the criminal justice system.

Finding a Utah Criminal Defense Lawyer

Salt Lake Criminal Defense LawyerWhether you are facing felony charges or misdemeanor prosecution, the consequences of conviction can be serious. Having the assistance of an experienced criminal defense attorney can make all the difference. Contact us today to arrange for an initial confidential consultation with Utah criminal lawyer Stephen Howard.

Contact us today to arrange for an initial confidential consultation.
OTHER CRIMINAL DEFENSE TOPICS


Best Rating
Make a Payment to Your Account
Get Help Now
Name: Email: Phone: Describe your legal needs here:
I accept the disclaimer below.
Disclaimer: No attorney-client relationship is established by the use of this form. Confidential or time-sensitive information should not be submitted through this form. By clicking 'submit' I am only requesting that I be contacted for the purpose of obtaining legal services.

This form protected by reCAPTCHA.

  • Selected Victories
  • Criminal Defense Trial AttorneyNot Guilty - Client was charged with aggravated assault for alleged attack using broken bottle as a weapon. Despite the testimony of numerous prosecution witnesses, thorough defense investigation to support a self-defense claim resulted in acquittal by jury at trial.
  • Criminal Appeals Defense AttorneyDismissed on Appeal - DUI case was dismissed after a successful appeal where the Utah Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's denial of the defense motion to suppress. Without the suppressed evidence, the prosecutor acknowledged that they did not have sufficient evidence to proceed to trial and the case was dismissed.
  • Utah Expungement Attorney Salt Lake Davis Expunged - Client with prior conviction for violent felony was ineligible for expungement through the courts. A successful 2-step reduction restored expungement eligibility and ultimately led to the court's decision to grant the requested expungement.
  • Utah Burglary Attorney Not Guilty - Client was charged with residential felony burglary and theft charges. Effective cross-examination of alleged victim at preliminary hearing resulted in an admission by the alleged victim that the charges were based on a false report to police, made for the purpose of getting revenge against the defendant. Case was dismissed outright.
Best Criminal Defense Strategy

Aggressive is good. Effective is better. The best defense strategy in any given criminal case can require in-depth analysis of the facts and a thorough understanding of applicable statutes, case law, and complex procedural and evidentiary rules. Having an experienced attorney on your side....

Strategy »
Salt Lake Criminal Defense Attorney Profile Utah

Defending against a criminal prosecution in Utah is a job that has to be done right the first time. Choosing the right attorney to defend you can be the most important decision you make. Our attorneys have extensive experience handling some of the most serious felony and misdemeanor charges on the books in Utah. No matter what charges you are facing, we can help....

Experience »
Conviction Consequences in Utah Criminal Prosecutions

Jail time, prison time, thousands of dollars in fines, and the lifetime collateral consequences of having a criminal conviction on your record - all of these and more are at stake when you are facing criminal prosecution in Utah. Understanding what is at risk is critical. Even so-called "minor" misdemeanor cases can have serious consequences....

Consequences »
Utah Criminal Defense Attorney - Reasons to Hope

Being charged with a crime is not the same as being convicted. But just being charged can affect more than you may have imagined - jail, job, family, bills, rent or mortgage. It can feel like everything has gone wrong, and may you wonder if anything can go right. But facing criminal prosecution does not mean giving up hope....

Reasons to Hope »
Home | Attorney Profile | Case Results | Criminal Code | FAQ | Legal Resources | Defense Strategy | Contact Us

Serving Salt Lake, Davis, Weber, Utah, Cache, Tooele, Summit, Box Elder, and Wasatch Counties, and all of Utah.

Attorney Stephen Howard practices as part of the Canyons Law Group, LLC and Stephen W. Howard, PC.

Offices in Salt Lake and Davis Counties
560 South 300 East, Suite 200, Salt Lake City, UT 84111
952 S. Main St., Suite A, Layton, UT 84041

Call now to arrange for a confidential initial consultation with an experienced and effective Utah criminal defense lawyer.

In Salt Lake City, call 801-449-1409.
In Davis County, call 801-923-4345.

Stephen W. Howard, PC

The materials in this website are intended for informational purposes only, and are not legal advice. Viewing or responding to materials in this site does not create an attorney-client relationship. Read Full Disclaimer.